The United States financial regulatory landscape stands at a critical juncture. With the recent passage of key stablecoin legislation, the GENIUS Act in July 2025The United States financial regulatory landscape stands at a critical juncture. With the recent passage of key stablecoin legislation, the GENIUS Act in July 2025

The US Wants Crypto Innovation: So Why Is It Still Regulating with an Orange-Era Test?

The United States financial regulatory landscape stands at a critical juncture. With the recent passage of key stablecoin legislation, the GENIUS Act in July 2025, and the ongoing, highly anticipated debate over comprehensive market structure bills like the CLARITY Act in early 2026, the nation is opening up to the crypto economy.

This momentum, coupled with a discernible shift in administrative posture from enforcement-heavy to innovation-friendly, signals a new era for digital assets.

Why the Howey Test No Longer Fits Crypto

The cornerstone of U.S. securities law, the 1946 Howey test, remains an anachronistic and ill-suited tool for the nuances of a rapidly evolving, often decentralized technological paradigm.

  • Why Crypto Is Going Down Today? XRP, Bitcoin, Ethereum and Dogecoin Prices Fall as $1.7B Gets Rekt
  • After Two Years Without Banks, Australian Traders Can Move Fiat on Binance Again
  • KBC Becomes “First Belgian Bank” to Launch Crypto Trading for Retail Investors

It is my firm opinion that relying solely on this decades-old precedent for a modern, multi-trillion-dollar global market is a fool’s errand that stifles innovation while failing to provide genuine investor protection. A new, crypto-centric framework is not just a regulatory desire; it is an economic necessity.

An Orange Grove Test Meets Decentralized Finance

The original Howey test, born from a dispute over orange groves in Florida, determines a security if there is an investment of money in a common enterprise with a reasonable expectation of profits derived solely from the efforts of others.

This framework, while flexible in its time, struggles to capture the essence of decentralized finance (DeFi), where the efforts of others are often distributed among countless, sometimes anonymous, participants, governed by immutable code rather than a central corporation.

The Securities and Exchange Exchange An exchange is known as a marketplace that supports the trading of derivatives, commodities, securities, and other financial instruments.Generally, an exchange is accessible through a digital platform or sometimes at a tangible address where investors organize to perform trading. Among the chief responsibilities of an exchange would be to uphold honest and fair-trading practices. These are instrumental in making sure that the distribution of supported security rates on that exchange are effectiv An exchange is known as a marketplace that supports the trading of derivatives, commodities, securities, and other financial instruments.Generally, an exchange is accessible through a digital platform or sometimes at a tangible address where investors organize to perform trading. Among the chief responsibilities of an exchange would be to uphold honest and fair-trading practices. These are instrumental in making sure that the distribution of supported security rates on that exchange are effectiv Read this Term Commission (SEC) has attempted to modernize its application, most notably with 2025 guidance emphasizing the expectation of profit and issuer influence criteria. This still leaves a gaping chasm of uncertainty, particularly for projects aiming for true decentralization.

Legal Uncertainty and the Cost to Institutional Adoption

The current approach fosters an environment where an asset may be considered a security at launch but a commodity later. This legal gray area is what most institutional investors fear to tread, thus hindering mainstream adoption and keeping the U.S. from cementing its crypto capital status.

We need a bespoke instrument, a DeFi Howey, that provides the clear token taxonomy that regulators and builders alike desperately need. This new test must be built on the reality of distributed ledger technology (DLT Distributed Ledger Technology (DLT) A distributed ledger or distributed ledger technology (DLT) is a database that is shared and synchronized across a number of different devices in different locations. DLT networks effectively eliminate the need for a centralized authority to act as the network’s custodian. In its place is a Peer-to-Peer (P2P) network as consensus algorithms to ensure replication across nodes is undertaken.The most common kind of distributed ledger network is a blockchain network. Blockchain networks are used to A distributed ledger or distributed ledger technology (DLT) is a database that is shared and synchronized across a number of different devices in different locations. DLT networks effectively eliminate the need for a centralized authority to act as the network’s custodian. In its place is a Peer-to-Peer (P2P) network as consensus algorithms to ensure replication across nodes is undertaken.The most common kind of distributed ledger network is a blockchain network. Blockchain networks are used to Read this Term), not shoehorned into an outdated agricultural precedent.

Toward a Crypto-Centric Regulatory Framework

Drawing on proposals such as Commissioner Hester Peirce’s safe harbor and the functional token taxonomy advanced by industry leaders, I propose a crypto-centric regulatory framework built around four core rules. The goal is to promote U.S. innovation while preserving investor protection.

Rule One: The Decentralization Threshold

A modern framework must establish a clear, verifiable standard for decentralization. Once a network or protocol meets this threshold, it should exit securities law oversight and fall under a commodity framework, likely overseen by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC).

Rather than relying on vague claims of “no central party,” regulators should assess measurable factors such as token ownership dispersion, the number of independent validators, and the immutability of smart contracts.

For example, if no single entity, including the founding team, controls more than a defined share—such as 20%—of governance tokens or validation power, the project would qualify. This provides a predictable path from launch to decentralization, addressing one of the industry’s most persistent legal uncertainties.

Rule Two: Functional Utility Versus Speculative Intent

The framework should prioritize a token’s actual use within a live network over speculative expectations. Tokens that serve clear, consumptive purposes—such as paying network fees, accessing services, or participating in on-chain governance—should be treated differently from passive investment instruments.

This functional approach better reflects how crypto networks operate and reduces the risk of utility tokens being swept into securities litigation solely due to secondary-market trading behavior.

Rule Three: Transparency and On-Chain Disclosure

Investor protection should be achieved through standardized, on-chain disclosures rather than traditional prospectuses. Projects should provide machine-readable information on audits, token supply and distribution, governance structures, and material risks.

This “code is law, disclosure is compliance” model aligns with the transparency of public blockchains and builds on disclosure principles embedded in the CLARITY Act.

Rule Four: Intermediary Liability and Consumer Safeguards

Regulation should focus on centralized intermediaries where most retail users interact. The GENIUS Act sets a useful precedent through reserve requirements and AML obligations. Strong oversight of exchanges and service providers can protect consumers without constraining decentralized innovation.

A Narrow Window to Get Crypto Regulation Right

The U.S. is at a pivotal moment. The current legislative momentum offers a rare chance to get this right. By moving beyond the archaic limitations of the Howey test and embracing a bespoke, forward-thinking framework, we can provide the regulatory clarity the market craves, protect investors, and ensure America remains a global leader in the digital financial revolution.

Sticking to the old ways in a new world is a path to irrelevance, and that is a price the U.S. economy cannot afford to pay.

Disclaimer: The articles reposted on this site are sourced from public platforms and are provided for informational purposes only. They do not necessarily reflect the views of MEXC. All rights remain with the original authors. If you believe any content infringes on third-party rights, please contact service@support.mexc.com for removal. MEXC makes no guarantees regarding the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of the content and is not responsible for any actions taken based on the information provided. The content does not constitute financial, legal, or other professional advice, nor should it be considered a recommendation or endorsement by MEXC.

You May Also Like

The Channel Factories We’ve Been Waiting For

The Channel Factories We’ve Been Waiting For

The post The Channel Factories We’ve Been Waiting For appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. Visions of future technology are often prescient about the broad strokes while flubbing the details. The tablets in “2001: A Space Odyssey” do indeed look like iPads, but you never see the astronauts paying for subscriptions or wasting hours on Candy Crush.  Channel factories are one vision that arose early in the history of the Lightning Network to address some challenges that Lightning has faced from the beginning. Despite having grown to become Bitcoin’s most successful layer-2 scaling solution, with instant and low-fee payments, Lightning’s scale is limited by its reliance on payment channels. Although Lightning shifts most transactions off-chain, each payment channel still requires an on-chain transaction to open and (usually) another to close. As adoption grows, pressure on the blockchain grows with it. The need for a more scalable approach to managing channels is clear. Channel factories were supposed to meet this need, but where are they? In 2025, subnetworks are emerging that revive the impetus of channel factories with some new details that vastly increase their potential. They are natively interoperable with Lightning and achieve greater scale by allowing a group of participants to open a shared multisig UTXO and create multiple bilateral channels, which reduces the number of on-chain transactions and improves capital efficiency. Achieving greater scale by reducing complexity, Ark and Spark perform the same function as traditional channel factories with new designs and additional capabilities based on shared UTXOs.  Channel Factories 101 Channel factories have been around since the inception of Lightning. A factory is a multiparty contract where multiple users (not just two, as in a Dryja-Poon channel) cooperatively lock funds in a single multisig UTXO. They can open, close and update channels off-chain without updating the blockchain for each operation. Only when participants leave or the factory dissolves is an on-chain transaction…
Share
BitcoinEthereumNews2025/09/18 00:09
Zwitserse bankgigant UBS wil crypto beleggen mogelijk maken

Zwitserse bankgigant UBS wil crypto beleggen mogelijk maken

De grootste vermogensbeheerder ter wereld, UBS, maakt zich op om een stap te zetten richting crypto. Volgens bronnen binnen de bank kijkt het Zwitserse concern
Share
Coinstats2026/01/24 02:48
Trump Nears Decision on New Federal Reserve Chair

Trump Nears Decision on New Federal Reserve Chair

The post Trump Nears Decision on New Federal Reserve Chair appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. Key Points: Trump nears decision on Federal Reserve Chair, evaluating
Share
BitcoinEthereumNews2026/01/24 02:53